He wins 220 million in the Super Lotto, marries again and dies: his ex-wife asks the widow for five thousand euros a month

A man who won 220 million euros playing the Italian lottery has died, leaving behind a complex inheritance dispute involving two ex-wives. The case, which has sparked legal debate, centers around whether the surviving spouse should continue paying a monthly allowance to the first wife after her husband’s death. The man, a truck driver from Padua, was 49 years old when he struck gold in 2019 during a work trip to Lodi. His win transformed his life, he quit his job, moved house and car, and invested much of the money. However, his personal life also changed dramatically. He divorced his wife, a 53-year-old cleaner from the Varesine region, with whom he had been in a troubled marriage for some time. They agreed on a monthly alimony payment of 6,300 euros. Shortly afterward, the man remarried, this time to a 37-year-old woman from Chieti. The couple married on July 24, 2025, and later settled in Padua. Just over a year later, on June 28, 2026, the man died suddenly, leaving no children or other legal heirs such as parents or siblings. As a result, his second wife became the sole heir to his entire estate. With his death came the end of the monthly payments to his first wife. She soon turned to lawyers to protect her rights. Her claim is based on Article 9-bis of Italy's divorce law, which allows courts to recognize an ongoing maintenance obligation for someone who previously received alimony and is now in need. This does not automatically transfer the responsibility to the new spouse, but rather requires proof of specific conditions. These include demonstrating financial hardship, assessing the previous level of support, considering potential survivor’s pension benefits, and evaluating the economic situation of both parties and the inherited assets. Legal representatives for the 53-year-old woman from Varese estimate that the new monthly payment could be around 5,000 euros, less than the 6,300 euros she received while her husband was alive. However, these figures are preliminary estimates and must be verified by the court. The judge will assess whether the necessary conditions exist for the recognition of the right and, if so, determine the exact amount after thoroughly examining the financial status of both women and the actual value of the inherited property. The case highlights the complexities that can arise even in seemingly straightforward situations. It underscores how personal relationships and legal frameworks intersect in unexpected ways, particularly when large sums of money are involved. While the legal process is still underway, the outcome will depend on the court’s evaluation of all relevant factors. Until then, the dispute remains unresolved, with the future of the first wife’s financial security hanging in the balance.